Heuristics and Biases in the Criminology of Compliance

doi:10.1017/9781108759458.036

36 - Heuristics and Biases in the Criminology of Compliance

from Part VI - Compliance and Cognition

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 May 2021

Greg Pogarsky

Edited by

Benjamin van Rooij and

D. Daniel Sokol

Show author details

Benjamin van Rooij: Affiliation:
School of Law, University of Amsterdam
D. Daniel Sokol: Affiliation:
University of Florida

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Abstract: In criminology, compliance is a central focus of the deterrence and rational choice perspectives on crime. In turn, these perspectives have been guided by traditional microeconomics. Behavioral economics, a recent branch of economics which pivots from and amplifies economic theories, has increasingly informed decision-making on a range of matters, including public health and finance. Criminologists have begun to marshal behavioral economic insights to better understand decisions surrounding crime and transgression. Prominent in behavioral economics are heuristics and biases in judgments under uncertainty. These involve shortcuts, rules of thumb, and other deviations from traditional economic norms, in how people navigate uncertainty. This chapter discusses how various biases and heuristics from behavioral economics research affect one of the most prominent decision-making constructs in criminology and compliance – perceptions about the likelihood of punishment for a contemplated transgression.

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Compliance , pp. 531 - 540

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108759458.036 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Andenaes, Johannes. 1974. Punishment and Deterrence. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Anwar, Shamina, and Loughran, Thomas A.. 2011. “Testing a Bayesian Learning Theory of Deterrence among Serious Juvenile Offenders.” Criminology 49: 667–98.Google Scholar

Apel, Robert. 2013. “Sanctions, Perceptions, and Crime: Implications for Criminal Deterrence.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 29: 67–101.Google Scholar

Apel, Robert, Pogarsky, Greg, and Bates, Leigh. 2009. “The Sanctions-Perceptions Link in a Model of School-Based Deterrence.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 25: 201–26.Google Scholar

Beccaria, Cesare. [1764] 1986. On Crimes and Punishment. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar

Becker, Gary S. 1968. “Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach.” Journal of Political Economy 76: 169–217.Google Scholar

Bentham, Jeremy. 1789. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Casey, Jeff T., and Scholz, John T.. 1991a. “Beyond Deterrence: Behavior Decision Theory and Tax Compliance.” Law and Society Review 25: 821–43.Google Scholar

Casey, Jeff T., and Scholz, John T.. 1991b. “Boundary Effects of Vague Risk Information on Taxpayer Decisions.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50: 360–94.Google Scholar

Dhami, Sanjit. 2016. Foundations of Behavioral Economic Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ellsberg, Daniel. 1961. “Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 75: 643–69.Google Scholar

Evans, L., Hall, L., and Wreford, S.. 2008. “Education-Related Parenting Contracts Evaluation” (Research Report DCSFRR030). London: Department for Children, Schools and Families, TNS Social.Google Scholar

Frederick, Shane. 2005. “Cognitive Reflection and Decision-Making.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 19(4): 25–42.Google Scholar

Geerken, Michael R., and Gove, Walter R.. 1975. “Deterrence: Some Theoretical Considerations.” Law & Society Review 9: 497–513.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gibbs, Jack P. 1975. Crime Punishment and Deterrence. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, Gerd, and Gaissmaier, Wolfgang. 2011. “Heuristic Decision-Making.” Annual Review of Psychology 62: 451–82.Google Scholar

Heller, S. B., Shah, A. K., Guryan, J., Ludwig, J., Mullainathan, S., and Pollack, H. A.. 2017. “Thinking, Fast and Slow? Some Field Experiments to Reduce Crime and Dropout in Chicago.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 132(1): 1–54.Google Scholar

Herman, Sherman, and Pogarsky, Greg. in press. “Morality, Acute Conformity, and Offender Decision Making.” Justice Quarterly.Google Scholar

Iwry, J., and Kleiman, M. A.. 2017. “A Nudge toward Temperance: User-Set Consumption Limits as an Element of Cannabis Policy.” https://ssrn.com/abstract=3166307 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3166307.Google Scholar

Kahneman, Daniel. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar Straus Giroux.Google Scholar

Kahneman, Daniel, and Frederick, Shane. 2005. “A Model of Heuristic Judgment.” In Holyoak, K. J. and Morrison, R. G. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning, 267–93. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kahneman, Daniel, and Frederick, Shane. 2002. “Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment.” In Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., and Kahneman, D. (eds.), Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, 49–81. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kahneman, Daniel, and Tversky, Amos. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.” Econometrica 47: 263–92.Google Scholar

Laub, John H. 2004. “The Life Course of Criminology in the United States: The American Society of Criminology 2003 Presidential Address.” Criminology 42(1): 1–26.Google Scholar

Locke, John. 1690. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. London: Thomas Basset.Google Scholar

Loughran, Thomas A., Paternoster, Ray, Piquero, Alex R., and Pogarsky, Greg. 2011a. “On Ambiguity in Perceptions of Risk: Implications for Decision-Making and Deterrence.” Criminology 49: 1029–61.Google Scholar

Loughran, Thomas A., Piquero, Alex, Fagan, Jeffrey, and Mulvey, Edward. 2011b. “Deterring Serious and Chronic Offenders: Research Findings and Policy Thoughts from the Pathways to Desistance Study.” In Dowd, N. (ed.), Justice for Kids: Keeping Kids out of the Juvenile Justice System. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar

Nagin, D. S. 1998. “Criminal Deterrence Research at the Outset of the Twenty-First Century.” Crime and Justice 23: 1–42.Google Scholar

Paternoster, Raymond, and Pogarsky, Greg. 2009. “Rational Choice, Agency, and Thoughtfully Reflective Decision Making: The Short and Long-Term Consequences of Making Good Choices.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 25: 103–27.Google Scholar

Pickett, Justin T. 2019. “Using Behavioral Economics to Advance Deterrence Research and Improve Crime Policy: Some Illustrative Experiments.” Crime and Delinquency 64(12): 1636–59.Google Scholar

Pickett, Justin T., and Bushway, Shawn. 2015. “Dispositional Sources of Sanction Perceptions: Emotionality, Cognitive Style, Intolerance of Ambiguity, and Self Efficacy.” Law and Human Behavior 39(6): 624–40.Google Scholar

Piquero, Alex, Paternoster, Ray, Pogarsky, Greg, and Loughran, Thomas A.. 2011. “Elaborating the Individual Difference Component of Deterrence Theory.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 7: 335–60.Google Scholar

Pogarsky, Greg. 2009. “Deterrence and Decision-Making: Research Questions and Theoretical Refinements.” In Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., and Hall, G. P. (eds.), Handbook on Crime and Deviance. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Pogarsky, Greg, and Herman, Shaina. 2019. “Nudging and the Choice Architecture of Offending Decisions.” Criminology & Public Policy. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745–9133.12470.Google Scholar

Pogarsky, Greg, Piquero, Alex R., and Paternoster, Ray. 2004. “Modeling Change in Perceptions about Sanction Threats: The Neglected Linkage in Deterrence Theory.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 20: 343–69.CrossRef Google Scholar

Pogarsky, Greg, Roche, Sean Patrick, and Pickett, Justin T.. 2017. “Heuristics and Biases, Rational Choice and Sanction Perceptions.” Criminology 55: 85–111.Google Scholar

Pogarsky, Greg, Roche, Sean Patrick, and Pickett, Justin T.. 2018. “Offender Decision Making in Criminology: Contributions from Behavioral Economics.” Annual Review of Criminology 1: 379–400.Google Scholar

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. [1712–78] 1974. The Essential Rousseau: The Social Contract, Discourse on the Origin of Inequality, Discourse on the Arts and Sciences, The Creed of a Savoyard Priest. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar

Sherman, Lawrence W., 1990. “Police Crackdowns: Initial and Residual Deterrence.” In Michael Tonry and Norval Morris (eds.), Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Vol. 12, 1–48. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Simon, Herbert A. 1990. “Invariants of Human Behavior.” Annual Review of Psychology 41: 1–20.Google Scholar

Slovic, Paul, Finucane, Melissa L., Peters, Ellen, and MacGregor, Donald G.. 2007. “The Affect Heuristic.” European Journal of Operational Research 177: 1333–52.Google Scholar

Stafford, Mark C., and Warr, Mark. 1993. “A Reconceptualization of General and Specific Deterrence.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 30: 123–35.Google Scholar

Thaler, Richard H. 1994. Quasi Rational Economics. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar

Thaler, Richard H. 2015. Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics. New York: WW Norton & Company.Google Scholar

Thomas, Kyle, and Loughran, Thomas A.. 2015. “Rational Choice and Prospect Theory.” In Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice, eds. Bruinsma, Gerben and David, Weisburd. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Thomas, Kyle J., Hamilton, Benjamin C., and Loughran, Thomas A.. 2018. “Testing the Transitivity of Reported Risk Perceptions: Evidence of Coherent Arbitrariness.” Criminology 56: 59–86 (published online in 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12154).Google Scholar

Tittle, Charles R. 1980. Sanctions and Social Deviance. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar

Tversky, Amos, and Kahneman, Daniel. 1974. “Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.” Science 185: 1124–31.Google Scholar

van Gelder, Jean-Louis, de Vries, Reinout E., and van der Plight, Joop. 2009. “Evaluating a Dual Process Model of Risk: Affect and Cognition as Determinants of Risky Choice.” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 22: 45–61.Google Scholar

Wilson, Theodore, Paternoster, Ray, and Loughran, Tom. 2017. “Direct and Indirect Experiential Effects in an Updating Model of Deterrence: A Research Note.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 54(1): 63–77.Google Scholar

Zajonc, R. B. 1980. “Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need No Inferences.” American Psychologist 35(2): 151–75.Google Scholar